Recently I discussed
a product reviewed with a friend of mine who also happens to sell
and import Hi-Fi gear. While he agreed that if this box did what I said it did, it
would be easily worth the money. He said "Another box? Not another box
in the system. I want things simple." Now you will likely not be surprised
that the suggestion of special, matched to his gear for best synergy, feet to
improve things drew similar responses. His idea is to have it all build in. While I
share his sentiments to some extent, the fact is that short of Mark
Levinson Audio (the Harman Company, not the Man), 47 Labs and perhaps Jeff
Rowland, few companies make equipment or systems that are complete in themselves
and can not be improved by sensible application of what many audio objectivists
refer to sneeringly as "useless tweaks" (being called a "tweak" by
those guy’s is a real insult).

I think one key
question here is similar to that of usefulness Feng-Shui: "Is there a real
change or is it all reverse psychology?". On one hand it is fairly sensible to
say that by applying changes/tweaks to your system, you change your own
relationship with it. The object becomes subject and as a result, even if "objectively", nothing has changed.
Still, you may subjectively perceive better
sound. To me this is perfectly valid if the expense is not excessive and the
result is that you enjoy the music more. Undeniably it is one of the
phenomena in connection with tweaks. Naturally, the opposite is true. If
one strongly disbelieves (or want to disbelieve as otherwise a whole system of
belief requires re-adjusting) then quite obvious "objective" changes
may indeed not be heard. So from this you can tell that tweaks are a
quite minefield.

I will state here
and now that many tweaks have real, often objectively quantifiable effects on equipment
while others seem to have no objective effect (even though they have a subjective
one). Moreover, I have often found that what makes a difference varies from person
to person with our learned response to sound. So audio
tweaking does indeed, in some ways, resemble Feng-Shui (the art of Chinese
Geomancy that combines solid positive psychology). By changing your environment
you change you perception of it and your attitude to it. This may be done with solid common sense
and practical suggestions (having the windows and doors in a house facing to the
south seems rational if the cold winds come from the Mongolian Steppes in
the north. Some of these are esoteric and spiritual on levels not amenable to
scientific analysis. And just as in Feng-Shui, the serious and honest
practitioners rub shoulders with charlatans who use a given concept and market
to extract the maximum gain for themselves without providing something of
corresponding value to their customers. It is often hard to tell which one is
which, yet I would not consider this a reason to just turn my back on the whole
scene. I originally had intended to run a little column under the "Audio
Feng-Shui" title, though lack of time does not permit this today.

Audio tweaking
requires solid common sense and some belief. To assess tweaks as a reviewer takes more. While the normal customer may like whatever she or he does,
as a reviewer people tend to rely on one's judgment for purchasing decisions (as
wrong as such reliance may be). Thus, the onus is on the reviewer to be perhaps
more cautious in his judgment and most importantly to develop the ability to
avoid the reverse psychological effect of "I just made an expensive change to
the system so it must sound better." As a former recording and live sound
engineer I might have a little more of this sober self questioning and control
than others. To me, just moving a microphone by a few inchs with relation to an
instrument often dramatically changes the sound, but not necessarily for the
better. I had to have the ability to quickly and accurately identify a
"change" or an "improvement". Sometimes a sober realization was
needed that the new and very expensive microphone (or effect, electronic box
or whatever) I had for test or was completely unsuited to the job I had at hand. I
am not sure
if that makes me a good or bad candidate to write about some tweaks. I
guess a bit of both as I am likely to react differently from a normal Audio
Enthusiast or Music Lover.

There is one thing I
would say here categorically, in a truly dogmatic ex cathedra pronouncement –
with the vast majority of commercial and DIY Hi-Fi gear the full sonic potential
will only be realized after careful and inspired "tweaking".
With my own
system stripped of all the "tweaks", but with all serious equipment
modifications in place, would not go from "great" to "awful".
Instead, if all tweaks where removed it would go from "great" to
only "jolly decent". So please use the following as a guide to things that I
have found worthwhile, but not as the Mantra or only way. It should server as a pointer into some directions where you might find a good step up in your
enjoyment of music for a modest outlay. Often a larger improvement than buying a
much more expensive new piece of gear.

Before trying esoteric tweaks at the margins, it is worthwhile to make sure the
basics are current. So room set-up and cables should have been reasonably settled
before we move on. On the other hand, if your system is full of tweaks and
cables bought not because you found them to make an improvement worth having but
on others people’s "say so", try taking all tweaks out and wire your
system with simple solid core cables. The DNM/Reson (British) "Rainbow"
series solid core cables have been long standing favorites of mine. The
Mapleshade Clearview Cables seem good in terms of cost and performance, though I
have not yet heard any of it. Therefore please take this recommendation with a little caution.
I have an upcoming article about very simple, solid core, DIY interconnect and
loudspeaker cables as well. It may be worth your wild to wait for that. Then sort the
loudspeaker/room
interactions out as much as possible. I hope to write another article on this
topic at some time, but for now there is loads of stuff on the Internet you can pursue.
Then work your way through the tweaks one by one, adding removing and deciding
what works best where and how.

One of the first
tweaks we will look at costs very little and at the same time it can transform
many music rooms. It can do this without risking a relationship break-up
when the significant other comes home and on noticing all the Room Tunes, ASC
Tube Traps etc. does not fall for the "but Darling, we had these for ages"
routine. It’s cheap too, which should keep the significant other quite happy.

I
Guess I Glued Too Much Felt Over My Ears...

This little
inexpensive tweak was discussed (by me) on a German Discussion board and led to
perhaps one of the most extreme outings of the long-standing "objectivist vs.
subjectivist" debate. While still managing to remain almost civil, the length
and extent of the arguing was a sight to behold. Also, it was interesting how
those with the least connections to having ever tried anything of the like where the
most vocal opponents of the idea that a few dozed 1" diameter felt disks glued
onto walls and onto the ceiling in strategic positions could make any
audible difference. I had only suggested placing them, without suggesting
any specifics of the changes to be expected. When the objectivists had finally
been shouted down by suggesting that:

A) the cost was only a few bucks

B)
they should not talk down something cheap and simple without trying.

Some of
those people did try and promptly failed to hear "anything".Many of the
less unwilling to believe in voodoo tried it too and heard differences of
varying degrees. The most astute and perceptive description of the changes came
from the only (?) female member of the board, very interesting. And of course
all those who did admit to hearing anything at all where promptly
ridiculed by the “sceptics” factions. Nearly a year later the issue still
occasionally makes waves, you have been warned.

So
what is this all about? The idea is filched straight from those great Combak/Harmonix
guys. I read a review of the RFA-78 in the German Hoererlebniss
HiFi Magazine and began thinking about the principles behind these
devices. Certainly placing selectively sound reflective/absorptive devices in a
room will change the acoustics. Within the photos I saw these devices and they reminded me
of those white/grey
felt disks you can find in any home improvement store to attach on chair legs
to prevent the floor from scratching
(see picture). In fact you can find them in many colors and they come adhesively backed. All the ones I have
tried so far where easy to place and remove without pulling paint or wallpaper
off the walls. It may be best to try it first in a spot where it won’t be terribly visible
if you are not sure.

So, I dropped down
to the local Homebase (UK Home Improvement Store chain) and I walked out
with enough of those disks to implement the full-suggested
applications of these. I even removed the large wall hanging carpet (backed with
acoustic foam) behind my listening couch, which was my previous only acoustic
treatment in the room, to see just how big the changes would be.

The application is
quite easy. You begin by placing three of the disks in each
corner of the room, as shown. Treating the corners of the room is the first step. Adding
further disks in further strategic positions on the walls and ceilings further
improve things, though I suggest starting with only the corners. If you have the
pictured wood laminate floor then don’t forget that. After all, it too is a sound reflective
surface. Remember, the lower room corners need their
treatment as much as the upper ones.

Before you start
treating the room stand in the center of the room and clap your hands hard. Try
listening to the slight resonant tail (a sort of “brriiiingy” sounding
echoey sound). Try again after treating the corners. If your room was rather
resonant before, it will now be much less so so. My British living room had, of
course, many more corners than a normal boxy room and the effect was very
noticeable.

The next step is to
place further felt disks at points of exactly half the distance between any two
corners and also one felt disk in the center of the ceiling. The next set of
felt disks goes onto the halfway point between existing pairs of disks. This is illustrated for the ceiling
showing the first (green), second (blue), third (red) and fourth (yellow) set of
disks. I stopped after the third set of disks on all walls and the ceiling, yet
no one stops you from going further. You can even go beyond four sets.

So what are the
audible results I hear you asking? Well, I noticed improved clarity and focus
for instruments, more natural vocals (the room is also very pleasant to
chat in, it just sounds real good) and a deepened and widened soundscape. They
do not do much for taming excessive bass, so some form of managing LF resonances
is still needed and I eventually did put the wall hanging carpet back as it adds
further to the overall absorption in the room. Given the simplicity and cost
this tweak is a major league deal.

Another
useful trick with these felt disks is to make a simple, cheap, and easy to
fit/remove version of the kind of diffraction control devices for tweeters. If your
loudspeakers use
normal dome tweeters they will almost invariably have an off-axis response that
is emphasized in the upper midrange. This may make the sound a little
brighter and harsher than true and can also confuse the imaging by causing too
many early reflections.

Taking in this case
a set of dark grey or black felt disks with a diameter similar to that of your
tweeter dome (or slightly larger), stacking two pieces on top of each
other and adhering them to front of the tweeter bracket as shown in the little sketch
(tweeter black, felt disks dark grey). This can give your soundscape better focus,
depth and width while also making the sound more relaxed and warm. There are
felt disks only on top and on the sides as a music room should really have a
thick carpet on the floor, at least between listener and loudspeakers. If that is
not possible, add a fourth double height felt disk set on the bottom of the
tweeters faceplate.

Please note that I
make no claims for my felt disk tricks to be the equal in principle, effect ,or
performance to the use of the not at all inexpensive Harmonix RFA-78 originals.
What I tried worked well for myself and quite a few others. Depending upon the
current offers and prices ,you can treat yourself to a much better sounding room
for perhaps $10 to $20 and an hour time. Are you game? And more importantly,
can you really afford not to try it out?

Have
You Been Huffing Lacquer Again...?

After
this escapade with the felt disks I guess some of you will ask that question.
And as it so happens, I have been huffing lacquer big time recently. But not for
narcotic reasons mind you. Strictly in the pursuit of being better able to enjoy the
music. The lacquer under question is the often controversial C37 from
the Austrian violin maker and acoustic researcher Dieter Ennemoser.

Rather than
repeating and paraphrasing Mr. Ennemoser's fundamental theories I’ll point to
the relevant web-pages and would indeed suggest that you buy and perhaps read his
book The Character of Sound. You can find two pieces on the basic
C37 theory at the following Links:

Sufficient
here to say that the C37 theory does not exist to explain what the lacquer does
and to support its sales Rather, the lacquer is part of a whole system of
working with and designing electro acoustic devices for music reproduction. The
German Brockhaus encyclopedia in 24 Volumes found Mr. Ennemoser’s book worthy
enough to mention under “Tone” as the most recent relevant work of notion...
along
with such well known works as Mr. Helmholtz’s 1913 publication Die Lehre
von den Tonempfindungen (“The Science of Sound Perception”).

By
now you can purchase a range of different C37 principle based loudspeakers. Fact
is, a number
of companies in Germany and surrounding countries modify equipment using the C37
principles and in some cases new designs include C37 Theory based features.
Perhaps most prominent and well known in the USA and the UK are Alesa Vaic’s
directly heated triode valves, some of which have their glass and internal
structures modified in accordance with the C37 Theory. This includes their mesh
anode
2A3 output tube. A surprisingly large number of applications are found in the
normally ultra conservative Pro Audio/Sound Reinforcement industry.

Very
little of all this C37 influenced gear has made it outside the German
speaking countries, never mind into the UK or USA. Occasionally a positive
press comment or two have appeared in show reports. But, the really good thing is that
you don’t have to wait for finished C37 products to appear in your nearest
Hi-Fi Emporium. Of course you can use C37 AVVT valves too. I have yet to get my
hands on any for test, sorry. Therefore no comments from me on these. But that is about
it.

This
is where the lacquer comes in. It has the interesting property to change the
resonance behavior of whatever it is applied to. Okay, now any lacquer or
surface coating will change more or less strongly the resonance behavior of
whatever it is applied to. The claim made for C37 lacquer is however that it
rather reliably and strongly changes this resonance behavior to one that is more
consonant with the way we hear. The result, more musical sound... or so at least
it is claimed.

I
encountered Mr. Ennemoser’s lacquer first more then a good while ago and have
been using it since then, commented about it in on-line discussion groups and
the like, but never really wrote a formal review. The reasons are manifold.
While it can justly be argued that C37 lacquer is an audio-component it’s very
nature makes a formal, structured review with assignment of absolute scores and
the like difficult.

When
I first heard about the lacquer over four years ago I was as skeptical as anyone
I could think of. I did take the time to read his C37 Theory (and later his
book). At the same time I was researching the relevance of harmonic distortion
patterns to how we perceive distorted sound (this triggered by working with SE
Valve Amp’s). I had come across a medical reference that described the ear as
not really being able to perceive a wide range of tones, instead in each octave
only a limited number of narrow bands are being physically perceived. This
sounded so close to Mr. Ennemoser’s C37 Theory, I simply had to try the
lacquer.

Since
I started lacquering the PCB of a DVD player I have had time to apply C37
lacquers of the varying temperature grades (IMPORTANT – make sure the lacquer
is for the right temperature range, like 22 Centigrade for loudspeakers, pickups and
tonearms; the 28 Centigrade stuff is suitable for most source electronics,
hotter running gear like valve amplifier’s or "Class A" transistor
amplifiers. The C37 is available up to 45 Centigrade operating temperature for all sorts of items.

At
current the lacquered items in my system include the Tannoy 15" coaxial
loudspeakers (just done recently) and previously used loudspeakers including the
enclosure. All my cartridges had the housings lacquered and small amounts of
lacquer carefully applied to the cantilever. All my own tonearms are lacquered.
The DVD player I used as a transport is lacquered internally to quite a serious
extent. My Behringer digital equalizer was recently lacquered, with excellent
results. I have C37 treated cables, little
wooden "Shim Mick" disks that sit on valves after being
lacquered with 45 Centigrade C37 lacquer or on equipment after being 22
Centigrade lacquered. I have solid pinewood platforms that are lacquered and sit
under gear...

As
you can tell, I’m really fond of the stuff. And no, it’s not because of the
sweet smells (the latest nitro diluted lacquer smells pretty foul actually). No,
it is what it does for my enjoyment of music. I am known to often modify gear
substantially or even to build and design it myself, but what I get from
applying C37 lacquer is nothing like what, for example, changing capacitors,
valves or op-amp does. Such changes can make the sound warmer, more
detailed, leaner, etc..

While
C37 lacquering does change the tonality to one that is generally more dynamic,
warmer and more pleasant. The biggest change is on an almost subliminal level.
The C37 lacquered gear sounds more open and detailed as before, but most
important – it sounds more listenable and more capable of communicating the
emotion in the music. Perhaps one receives less signals of "it’s
artificial" from a C37 treated system?The
key difference between a system with C37 and one without is not a bit of
tonality, or more detail or less exaggerated sibilance, or a wider soundstage, or
other such easily described and quantified audiophile issues. It is a difference
much deeper. It is one between more musical realism and a simple canned music.

On
an emotional level it works a similar magic as single ended valve amplifiers,
non-oversampling DAC’s, vinyl records, high sensitivity speakers, a ‘lil tot
of Glenlivet or a glass of good Claret. It makes listening to music more
involving. It makes me want to listen more. It makes listening easier. I
concentrate more on the music, on the phrasing, on the emotions and I simply
forget to listen to the “Bass’s” and the “Trebles” and the
“Soundstage”. I listen instead to the notes, the musicians, the silences
between the notes, and the sharp rasp of the bow on a string all these things.
Applying C37 to your system humanizes the perceived sound. When I have too much
non C37 treated gear in my system I badly miss the effect.

The
effect of C37 lacquer is greatest (obviously) with transducers (pickup
cartridges, loudspeakers, CD player clock crystals, etc.) and electronics closer to the
source. So lacquering for a taster only the dome tweeter in a normal pair of
loudspeakers and the dustcap of the woofer as well as the DAC chip and the crystal
clock of the CD player will give you a good idea of what this stuff does. For
such things a 10ml each of 22 Centigrade and of 28 Centigrade (or higher if your
CD player runs very hot) lacquer can be had from the local distributors. The
cost will usually be a little over $120.

This
seems expensive for two little bottles of lacquer, yet I would say that given
its effect this price is a small one to pay. In the USA Richard
Vance’s Art & Audio is the distributor, in Germany Clockwork
Audio. The distributor network is still rather patchy, so C37 lacquer can be had
in somewhat larger quantities up to serious OEM quantity half litre bottles
directly from Mr. Ennemoser’s C37.net on-line
shop.

I
can not recommend C37 lacquer enough, but obviously some sense should prevail.
While six coats C37 lacquer will improve a $5 radio loudspeaker it is unlikely to
convert it into the equal of a $500 Lowther, AER or similar driver. Yet applying
$150 worth C37 to said $500 pair of Lowther drivers (you’ll have loads left
over if you buy 50ml) can give you the most significant improvement possible
other than a really good horn loaded enclosure.

So
get down to huffing lacquer yourself. What do you have to loose? The monetary
equivalent of a few CD’s. A lot of auditory ballast in your system which
dampens your enjoyment of the music. Oh yes, and the illusion that simple solid
electronic and mechanic design guarantees good sound... should you still hold to
it.

Having
A Bad Case Of Digititis?
Step Right Up - Get The Antidote Here...

Okay,
no more far out crazy and esoteric tweaks that have so far been eliciting shouts
of "voodoo", "bunk", and "make-believe" from the objectivist benches.
Not that C37 and felt disks cannot make a dramatic contribution to getting the
most enjoyment of the music from your existing Hi-Fi. Not to say that either of
these items has no real effect (they do). Or that is it indeed
measurable (if you measure the right things), and not to say that these things
are just reverse psychology that make you believe you heard something. They are
absolutely not such. They are very real and in my not so humble opinion very
relevant things to do in the context of most music reproduction systems.

Our next
"tweak”" is
firmly rooted in the classic domain of electronics and it has a defined and
quantifiable operation. It’s patented too. Again, it is an item that I have
been familiar with for a good while and which I have in a home-grown, DIY
version used for a good few years. What I am on about is Tony Taddeo’s "Digital Antidote.
More precisely, the pretty new passive version of his
Digital Antidote II. With the passive Digital Antidote II things have come full
circle.

Around
ten years ago Mr Taddeo designed the original passive Digital Antidote and
started to market it. It was intended as inexpensive, effective cure to that
illness often called "Digititis" (a malaise that seems even now to be
present with most CD replay gear). You hear Digititis best when comparing good LP
replay against CD. First, listen to perception of the acoustic space, then
concentrate on instruments like cymbals and the sibilants in human voices. It
will be quickly clear what “Digititis” is. A more
technical explanation and pretty graphs of the problem included can be
found on the manufacturers website.

Back
to those heady days in the early 90’s... In those days’ reviews of the
passive unit showed inconsistent operation and an often noticeable treble
roll-off for the original unit. It seems the passive unit was subject to
impedance variations in the partnering gear (something I have also observed
myself with my DIY unit) and generally was not the success it should have
perhaps been. Still, when Wavelength Audio’s Gordon Rankin turned me onto this
passive unit as a good tweak sometime in the later 90’s I tried a DIY copy of
it and liked what was heard.

Yes,
the unit assembled based on the circuit in the patent did cause some modest high
frequency roll-off, but the gains in naturalness, air and soundscape extension
and definition made it well worth my time. Over the years I also noticed the
possible problems with interactions in the impedances of source and receiving
device. In most cases there where no problems. But in some, especially with
CD-Players having a very high output impedance and/or amplifiers/preamps with a
very low input impedance colorations and sometimes substantial high frequency
roll-off was observed. What the DA did do was to make CD sound much more
analogue, much more like what I got from Vinyl than without the DA. When over
the year’s people where impressed with the sound from CD in my system, often
part and parcel of this where cables with a box along each, filled with a copy
of the original DA.

Coming
to the end of the 1990’s Tony Taddeo only manufactured the active version of
the Unit, with a price that in recent years went up to nearly 1,000 Dollar.
While the acceptance in the market for boxes that go between CD-Player and
Preamp and are not DAC’s has increased (watch the proliferation of tubed and
other buffers, transformer interfaces etc) at this price the active unit does
not necessarily appeal to all that many. Moreover, to justify a $ 1,000
accessory the CD-Player or DAC should be of pretty high quality.

Well,
good news – in this new and brave millennium Mr. Taddeo has brought the
passive Antidote back, updated in circuit and operation based on the research
over the last decade and at a price lower than ever! Yup, a decade ago the
original passive DA would have set you back $170, now with plenty of inflation
added the passive DA II is yours for only $99.

Having
had the passive DA II around now for a good few weeks I had the chance to burn
it in well and to try it with a variety of gear. I have also (obviously)
compared it to my old DIY Unit. In fact, to my shame I must admit to having
build another Copy Antidote, going all out on component quality and making this
balanced as most of my system is moving towards balanced connections nowadays.
It has seen service with the tube output Heart CD-6000 I’m reviewing right
now, with a heavily modified late 1980’s Philips LHH-1000 DAC, a modified
Marantz CD-67 player and even my set-top digital TV box.

Sonically,
the passive DA II has a much smaller "footprint" than the older passive
version. I could not detect any subjectively audible high frequency roll off,
though a very modest such is still present according to my measurements. In
general the sonic effect of the DA II is a little less obvious than the older
version, a good thing in my view. With the Heart modified, tube output Marantz
CD-6000 the passive DA II improved both soundscape width and depth while making
cymbals less splashy and vocals a little smoother and more natural. My friend
Jon summed it nicely when he said "This is much easier to listen to"
comparing the system with and without the passive DA II. The new passive DA II
also seems a little more tolerant of higher than normal source impedances than
the older unit.

From
experience I know that the Digital Antidotes do not in general work with
CD-Players having Digital Filters with an action similar to the DA, namely those
with Wadia’s Digimaster filter, those with Denon's Alpha processing,
Kenwood’s D.R.I.V.E. and Pioneers Legato Link filters. Also with the
non-oversampling DAC’s I tried (not commercially available units) I did not
find the DA useful or desirable. But Mr. Taddeo gives you 30-day money back
guarantee should the DA II not work for you.

Well,
if I had not been using something very similar to the DA II for years I’d give
you rave now about how much it has changed my enjoyment of music. But I did that
a long time ago. Today homemade Devices based on Mr. Taddeo’s designs are to
me simply part and parcel of my system, take them away and the music looses
things that consider essential. The new passive DA II not only overall improves
on those homemade things, it is readily available at a VERY reasonable price and
will make a very substantial improvement for most affordable and mid-priced
systems.

Foot
Worship And Other Kinky Stuff...

Another
classic stone of contention are the various equipment feet offered by the
industry. Products range from very inexpensive items to extremely costly pieces
made from all sorts of strange materials all the way to major investment air or
magnetic suspension systems such as Vibraplane's, Clearaudio Magix, SAP Relaxa
or Max Townshend’s air suspended equipment racks. I have played over the years
with all sorts of things extensively, tried some of the really high priced stuff
as well as cheap or free stuff.

What
I have learned is that it is important to use your own ear and judgment. No two
pieces of equipment react the same way to a set of feet. The problem is that
what we do is to change (again – see also C37) the resonance behavior of a
given piece of equipment. Using footers and various things to place on top of
gear will alter the microphones, the way mechanical resonance energy is drained
from the chassis and so on. So the only solution is to have a lot of different
things at hand and to try them all. Some equipment pieces benefits from
isolation, others need rigid coupling still others need a mixture.

The
second thing that I have learned is that items that are based on the same
functional principle generally react alike, though differences in material and
execution give rise to differences in sound. Yet the cheapest “cones” that I
have give me much of the sound of some of the most expensive of such to cross my
path. The biggest difference was between the various metal cones and those made
from ceramic (DH Labs), in the end I could not really see the point of spending
the extra money and stuck with what I had.

So,
below I’ll not give a blow by blow account of how each of the footers I have
around sounds with the various pieces of gear I have around (this would be a
huge article). Rather, I mention the in my view cost effective items I keep
around and use regularly.

One
of the key things that can drastically influence the sound and that are easy to
find are equipment platforms. Of course, you can go and get the boutique stuff
with the high price tags and some of those are really good (especially
Symposium) but the outlay is high and often the results are not as predictable
as one would like. I suggest haunting your local Superstores for Marble "pastry"
cutting boards and getting equipment sized pieces of 18mm Spruce or
Pine wood (solid boards, not plywood) cut. I personally have found myself by far
preferring the natural wood boards, C37 lacquered over marble. But I can equally
see things go the opposite way.

To
couple the equipment to the platform many options exist, I use the “Shim
Mick”, little wooden disks
our editor Steven R. Rochlin send me ages ago, they are from Basketville (802) 387-5509, 1077 Wooden
Wheel part number CWY00282. I normally lacquer them with C37. With
Marble Platforms ceramic of metal coupler work well, but again the wooden disks
can weave their "magic" there too. Of course, depending upon the piece
equipment on top of the platforms any others of the discussed footers also
feature occasionally.

The
Platforms sit on all sorts of feet or other items. At the moment I have a
pinewood Platform on which rests a Heart CD 6000, supported on the platform by
three sets of two each of Steve’s wooden disks. Under this platform I use my
latest discovery. These came out of a parcel from Amazon.com, bringing me my
latest acquisitions in music, namely Linkin Park’s Hybrid Theory on
vinyl and the Spiritual Life Music sampler on CD. Packed in where air
cushions branded Cell-O from
Free-Flow Packaging International. These differ from other air cushions
I have come across by their small size and the material, a much stronger Mylar
that looses air pressure much less than the more common types. Anyway, Flopac
suggests re-cycling these things, I guess I get a good Boy Scout sticker for
that one. These air cushions float the platform on air while keeping dynamically
very stable. Highly recommended.

BTW, prior to finding the
described arrangement for the CD 6000 I tried rigid coupling with cones (bad,
made the bass a little tighter but the sound became shrill), and I found that
the best simple commercial footer under the CD 6000 in my arsenal where the Final
Labs Daruma 3-II ball bearing thingies. I have found them in recent
times consistently very good under CD-Players and transport, where they often
give a more tuneful, tight Bass with more weight and impact as well as opening
up the sound in general. They are in the end not as effective as the air
suspension under the Heart CD-6000 yet under my Pioneer DVD player (which is
also used as CD transport) they clearly are superior to even air suspension,
giving a tight bass slam that turns a littlesoft with air cushions. For the cost of $99 per set of three they are
likely a must-have unless you already have other, more expensive items that work
on the same principle (Aurios, Symposium) which may very well be better. I
simply have not been able to try them yet. Anyway, under a CD player the Daruma
3-II work great! I liked them less with valve pre-amplifiers where air suspension
again usually clinches it.

Another
type of footers are cones. They work great under Speakers and many other items
farther back in the chain. My large Tannoy Corner York's are coupled to the
floor using three large Michell Tenderfeet
Aluminum cones. At a cost of £10 ($14)
for a set of three they are certainly at bargain basement prices for footers. At
these prices you can afford to buy a large batch. I use them also under a large
and heavy laminated glass plate which forms my amplifier stand. The smaller
cones can work well under smaller equipment pieces and are even cheaper.

The
amplifier is on my amplifier platform, however it sits on a mixture of fixed height brass cones
(no idea where they came from) and a four piece (two per amplifier) set of a height adjustable
Goldring Perfect Sound spikes. The combination of the amplifier’s own large
weight, their rigid coupling to the large and heavy glass plate and in turn the
rigid coupling of this to the floor result in tight, impactful bass while
cleaning up the midrange somewhat. As I use for the amplifier’s four suspension
points at least one such must be adjustable to ensure the rigid coupling. The
Goldring Spikes (or something equally adjustable) are absolutely needed for my
amplifiers.

Goldring
makes a range of spikes and cones, all adjustable to aid the leveling of
equipment. I have not found much about them in the US, but they are effective
and inexpensive. The larger Spikedampers make a good figure under CD players or
Amp’s if not as good as Final Labs Daruma’s, giving a measure of decoupling
and a rigid suspension of the item. I now use three of those under the stand
alone motor unit of my Turntable to make sure the motor is smack bang level and
has no real freedom of movement. At the same time the motor does generates
vibrations. Using simple adjustable cones lead to some slightly rough sound,
Spikedampers into the breech and all was great. Goldring Cones and Spikes also
feature on my equipment rack, which being British is Metal and Glass, somewhat
like Mana. I replaced the squishy things between the frame and Shelf with
various Goldring cones and spikes, glued a square of sorbothan to the centre of
the shelf and adjusted my spikes and cones until I got the shelf level and until
I got the clean, quickly decaying ring from the shelf with no rattling, again
much like the adjustment procedure for a Mana Rack. Doing this a long time back
resulted in a much more open sound, better pace and timing. I never really felt
any inclination to upgrade my equipment support since. No, it is likely nowhere
nearly as good as the Mana Stands, but it only cost me altogether something like
$ 200 in all and manages to genuinely make gear placed on it sound better.

I
think this will have to conclude this round of the freakzoid Tweekaloid, no
doubt I’ll be back soon, as I have more tweaks around and to mention that work
well and don’t break the bank. Just before I go though a quick link to a
French web-page that shows another no/low cost tweak that I use daily and find
it to work great. Even if you don’t speak French, the pictures tell the story:

All
I can say is that I’ll be damned if I know why the CD-Flop does what it does,
but I tried it both with disks that had data on them and with bulk erased ones
– the bulk erased disks had little or no effect, those with data did make a
pretty solid improvement and have since sneakily made their way throughout my
circle of friends and acquaintances. To quote for a change one of those, well
known Audio-buddy Adnan Arduman (he has loads
of interesting HiFi Systems on his website) on the effect:

"Thorsten
shared with me a very interesting tweak of his own (no
it isn’t my own, blame Thierry Foucher for this one - Thorsten)
consisting of the inner magnetic disc of a 5.25" old style floppy disc
(which should be cut to exactly match the diameter of the CD). All you need to
do is to place this floppy disc on top of your CD. The on-and-off testing
clearly showed that when the tweak was in place the sound had more presence,
more inner detail, more air and more depth. And the improvements were far from
being subtle. Back at home I tried the same tweak on my Marantz SA-1, but this
time the differences were much subtler. So I recommend to try it on your own CD
players as the tweak costs nothing.”

Okay,
till another time I leave you with a lot of tweaks to try and I hope they help
you to really start Enjoying The Music.